Patch is coming out tomorrow, we will post patch notes soon as riot has them up.
More on the New League System in Ranked
In case you missed the big announcement, you can read more about it here.
This is interesting. I'm wondering what happens if you lose your division or promotion series best of three or best of five. Do you lose all your current league points and start over, or is it a relatively quick process to try again? I'm sort of picturing current Elo Hell complaints to be translated into people complaining about bad luck in games that are artificially more important than the rest of the process.
It's not a big deal if you lose a division or promotion series. You'll simply end up back in the ladder rankings with say, 60-90 LP (depending on how the series went) and there's nothing preventing you from qualifying for another series quickly.
What if no one in your "league" is on at 4am... That mean you cant play ranked?
You can still be matched against anyone else who's playing ranked at that time, even if they're in a different league, division, or tier. So you shouldn't have any trouble finding matches at 4 AM. In fact, given my sleep schedule recently, you'll probably have me on your team.
If you cannot drop tiers does that mean you will continue to be matched with the people at the bottom of your tier no matter how many times you lose afterwards? And if so do you have a system implemented in order to resolve elo boosting and/or getting lucky in your placement matches and then continually underperforming in a tier you don't belong in?
Matchmaking will continue to match you based on a hidden MMR (matchmaking rating) that's tracked behind the scenes. If you are continually losing matches at the bottom of Gold tier, you'll start to play against Silver players even though you're in a Gold league.
There are a lot of checks and balances that must be passed before you can move up a tier, so we don't think that it will be common for players to be in this situation (with the exception of something like Elo boosting, which we'll be continuing to address).
Will our elo be resetting then?
We won't be resetting ratings, no. Players and teams will seeding into a league based on a combination of their current and top ratings from the preseason. If you didn't play enough games in the preseason, then you'll be placed into a league when you finish your tenth game (or fifth game for a team).
This seems interesting, however I'm concerned with how fast we'll win those "League points". I mean, at the moment you get ~100 elo if you win 8-9 times in a row, which would be equivalent to going up one division (actually, since current tiers are divided into 350 elo, one division would be more like 75 but w/e). But I'm getting a feeling that we're going to win far less than 15 points and that as such, going up will take a much bigger number of games, resulting in the contrary of what the OP states, aka "shows your progression in a meaningful way".
We're still doing the final tweaking of the numbers, but it won't be uncommon at all to earn 15 LP from a win. The speed of progression through leagues will feel very similar to the previous system assuming a similar pattern of wins and losses.
When you upgrade divisions will you start with 0 league points or like 50 or something?
I imagine starting with 0 would be frustrating cause you lose one game in that division and youre demoted already and have to re-qualify
You start with 0 LP, yes, but there's a grace period where it's impossible to be demoted for the first few games in the new division, so losing won't really cost you anything. You can look at it as a time to relax for a bit after successfully getting through a division series.
This will promote trolling and non-tryharding play... not good for ranked.
It's still far better to win those matches than to lose them. If you win you gain LP and are that much closer to the next advancement series. Having more LP is always better for you, so players will always want to win a match rather than lose it, even if they won't lose any LP from a loss.
What's the logic behind hiding our ELO, or "match making ranking" from us?
Personally, I LIKE being able to track my ELO, however low it may be. It's my motivation for wading through the B.S and trolls to play ranked games in the first place. I don't think seeing a generic League badge is going to feel nearly as personalized or rewarding.
You're not just earning a "generic league badge". You still have tiers, divisions, and League Points to battle over as you progress through the system. You also get to compete on a ladder with a small grouping of other players, often which will include your friends, rather than being just a cog in a giant wheel of hundreds of thousands of opponents.
Give it a try and give us feedback though! We're aiming to have the league system on the PBE shortly.
I don't think this Red understand the nature of trolling. Did you ever watch the new Batman movie with the Joker?
Some trolls don't care about winning some trolls just want to watch the world burn.
Sure, trolls will be trolls, and this system won't necessarily change that. I was merely pointing out that there won't be a situation where players don't at all care if they win or lose. Which as someone pointed out, could certainly increase ranked trolling. At the end of the day, we have to discourage and prevent trolling through other specific methods, and the Player Behavior team is constantly experimenting and iterating there.
Seems like you can game the system by throwing a ton of games after each time you go up a skill tier, and then proceed to pubstomp your way to the next skill tier.
Please tell me this has been considered already.
If your hidden matchmaking rating (MMR) is far below where it should be for your current division, you will gain LP much more slowly. Similarly, if for some reason your MMR is far above where it should be for your current division, you will gain LP more quickly. Throwing games will not help you out in this system. It's always better to win the game you're playing, regardless of if it's part of a division series, or if you've just been promoted, or if it's just a typical game in the middle of the division standings.
It could also mean that I'll be matched AGAINST my friends if they're in the same league, which is not exactly a nice experience imo. Unless the matchmaking tries to pair us together if we're playing at the same time or something.
Leagues don't affect matchmaking. You can still be matched against anyone in the entire system, so being in the same division as a friend just allows for some friendly banter and competition. Itdoesn't mean you will play with or against them more often (unless of course, you duo queue).
Can the promotion/division series be done with other people (random or from league) doing such series ? It would be nice to have a shared goal, and maybe force players to work together a lil more.
Edit: I mean the matchmaking would try to group people from the same tier/division doing promotion matches together if possible
It won't work this way at launch but it's high on our list of possible post-launch improvements. We agree that it could be pretty awesome to only match people who are in a series together so that everyone has the same stake in the match outcome. It'd be difficult to do this in Diamond without slowing down matchmaking significantly, but it should be very doable for the other tiers.
For now, we won't be telling anyone else that you're participating in a series, so it's up to you if you want to let people know or not. We look at it as being similar to starting a game at 1490 Elo in the previous system, where you know that you'll get to Gold if you win, and other players in the match aren't necessarily in the same boat.
They tried this in Starcraft 2 and though lots of people liked it the hardcore gamers at the top complained there wasn't a defined ladder ranking. They ended up making Grandmaster League which was it's own league of 200 players. Does the top LOL league work the same way with only one division so we can easily know who the top players in the country are?
Yeah there's only going to be one league at the top (the challenger league) for the very best players on each realm. We put a big focus on this since the top teams will have regular opportunities to play against pro teams for a spot in the LCS during promotion tournaments.
Yeah, after some consideration, I drastically prefer the current elo system, because it is simpler and easier for points of comparison. People do not use the current ladder system to find out they are 12039 of 12039320 players, they use it to see they are 100 elo higher than their friend.I think you'll find that you can compare with other players just as easily as you could before. Someone who's in Gold Division I is ahead of someone who's in Gold Division III. Someone who has 75 LP in Gold Division I is closer to a promotion than someone who has 50 LP in Gold Division I.
On top of that, the system will attempt to put you in leagues with your friends, so you'll be able to compare against some of your friends very directly since you'll be on the same league ladder as them.
TLDR: would duo q'ing with someone of a higher tier give you more League Points than Solo Q?
No, duo queuing with someone who's in a higher tier wouldn't give you more LP. It's based on the expected win percentage of your team in the matchup, and the fact that you're in a lower tier than your opponents would be offset by the fact that you have a higher tier player on your team as well.
If there's only one league at the top, to qualify to move into it, do you have to knock someone out of it? Or is it adaptive and expands in size?
If you move up into Challenger Tier then you knock someone else out. Once you've reached that level of badassery, you've got to fight to keep it. This is the only League where that will be the case.
Champion Price Reduction Schedule
As previously announced, well be reducing champion prices on a fixed schedule going forward, which is primarily based on champion release dates. The initial price reductions on Ezreal, Vladimir, Renekton, Nocturne, Lee Sin, Brand and Vayne have already been completed.
Here are the details on the next set of scheduled price reductions. Please note that because these price reductions are preannounced, refunds will not be granted to players who purchase these champions prior to their price reductions.
- 1st champion launch of 2013: Yorick reduced to 4800 IP / 880 RP and Udyr reduced to 1350 IP / 585 RP
- 2nd champion launch of 2013: Leona reduced to 4800 IP / 880 RP
- 3rd champion launch of 2013: Wukong reduced to 4800 IP / 880 RP
Additionally, all newly launched champions in 2013 will be reduced from their initial price of 7800 IP to 6300 IP after one week. Click here for more background on the pricing changes and how these champions were selected for reductions.
We'd go back to the original idea. I should dev log Darius' development sometime.
Originally, Darius had 7 stacks of hemorrhage and the ramp-up on how much the ult did was much more stark (low stacks were terrible, full stacks was what you see now - and it only did true damage at max). This wasn't perfect, but it's much closer to the design intent; let me explain that and then you'll know where I'd like to go with him in the future.
For Darius, his gameplay should be about building stacks and keeping them up over a longer period of time. When he reaches a threshhold that's actually difficult to reach, then his ultimate should rip you in half. I'd also like an ability for him to spread stacks for real insanity with this design. Let me give you my idea as it stands today;
The play pattern is that Darius wants to get to 10 stacks to just murder people hard. The counter-play should be to get him off you at least long enough for stacks to fall off. The longer the fight, the more advantageous to Darius. Ratios and stats changed to favor lower AD, tankier build to support this.
Hemmorhage: Changed to maximum 10 stacks on a target. DoT damage adjusted to match, with something like 5 now = 7 in this model. All skills interact with # of hemmorhage stacks on the target. Auto-attacks and skills apply 1 stack.
Blood-Soaked Blade A slight redo on the Q, this still does PBAOE damage and adds a stack of bleed. Any targets hit have their hemmhorage stacks shared with that target's allies.
Crippling Strike No longer gets shorter cooldown with hemmorhage, but instead increases the slow % and duration per stack. At max, this would get to something like 80% for 5 seconds. At 0 stacks, 0% slow, but still an AA reset.
Apprehend Unsure, but maybe just numbers.
Noxian Guillotine Does (small) base damage, +(OK) AD ratio. Base damage and armor penetration (10% per stack) increase per stack of Hemmorage. Ult STILL RESETS, as ten stacks should not be a particularly common occurance, and should be the state Darius is trying to achieve (and the state enemies are trying to prevent).
So, this would require testing etc, but it captures the spirit of Darius that matches the original intent of something that significantly ramps over time, and the gameplay revolves around preventing Darius from reaching short-term critical mass in an engagement, while he's trying to set up limited windows for a kill. The psychology should exemplify tension, as every move he can just hold on to for a little longer has greater power when used - either getting greedy by waiting too long or getting zealous by using things too early will cause Darius to miss his chance to beat someone in a fight.
Might also make 1-9 stacks linear growth, 10 gets a big bonus.
I actually think 10 stacks would be too hard to build up in lane, considering malphite (my main solo top) has an 8 second cd on his q and therefore can actually back off for the full 5 seconds to allow hemorrhage to go down. Not forgetting that jax and fiora can also dodge getting hemorrhage stacks and out fight darius. All in all too much of a nerf, you would have to change the duration of hemorrhage to 10 seconds from 5.
It would be. That's why you shouldn't get it all the time - this exact feedback (and our mistake in being too quick to react to it) results in the Darius on live, who has little play/counterplay.
No bleed stacks as his passive. No 5% extra movespeed in his passive. No passive armor pen in Apprehend. No true damage on his ult. (I don't mind the reset) Darius is the only one who can literally build full tank and still get a pentakill.
This doesn't address the issue, instead, its just taking power away, but not adding any gameplay decision-making to it.
Wouldn't the armor pen on his ult just stack with his E that way?
Yeah, easy to fix though (80% max, or make the 20% after apprehend, etc). Not terribly important to the intent for this exercise, but good eye.
TLDR: The estimated life span of champions in a team fight is TOO SHORT to allow this kind of design. And thus we have Darius like he is currently.
I do have that worry, which is I think the other feather in the hat that got us where we're at today. I think if this direction, though, can't work for Darius, then he's relegated to "lolbruiser" that has low interaction. I do tend to see longer teamfights than this though....so...
And on a side note, how would Last Whisper stack with it all?
Multiplicatively, like all pen %'s.
The teamfight might last longer than a few seconds but it gets decided by that time. A key member of one team goes down first and it causes the other team to either run or take out what they can and die for it.
I am just saying that fights are over quite quickly and the design space for large overtime threat and low quick threat or instant threat is very limited. Karthus is a good "long term threat design" example of this mostly because of his passive.
In our current meta where damage outscales defenses and thus mostly squishy champions are played besides those that work with health or counter health stacking, fights do not last that long even for warmog targets.
I jut do not see how darius gets to 10 passive stacks in a meaningful way before the fight is already decided.
I think the assumption is that he just is expected to get to 10 stacks to be effective. My expectation is that he can sometimes get to 10 stacks, but can hit a breakpoint where something is good to use before that, if he needs it faster. Basically, to create this, you can't let him reach max every time, but max should be obscene.
Hey Morello - I'm just going to leave this here:
http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/....php?t=2920493 (Includes all most of your quotes on the official Champion Retrospective video)
Please read it through if you got the time - please don't respond there yet though. If you don't have the time I hope you skip through it, checking if we have some valid point, if you think we do I hope you'll visit our Summary thread soon, I'm working on that right now.
EDIT: here a link of a thread called 'I think I finally understand Darius' - a thread with 190 upvotes explaining how he's not OP:
You're very correct here - this is the way we made Darius get to a state of balance that's not out of whack, but I still am not a big fan of all the counterplay only being in the setup - I like things to happen in reaction to things where possible. It works, but it's a bit ham-fisted.
Now, I'm not saying we'll go in my direction here - this is just where I'd take it if I did it. I'd like to see stack gameplay emphasized more though, and if that number's not 10, or there's a different route, that's fine, but without a gameplay hook that's distinct, I don't think he can ever have interesting decisions to make beyond "how you play LoL."
Lyta on Toxic Players and the Tribunal
The prevalence and severity of toxicity in general has seen dramatic improvements across League of Legends; however, most of this improvement tends to be in Normal Modes or Co-op vs AI Modes. We're seeing lower AFKs/Leavers in these modes, and less reports/toxic behavior overall per active player. We're trying to figure out which stats related to player behavior we should share in 2013, so hopefully I'll have more specifics in the future.
Whenever I see players mention how toxicity is at an all-time high, there's a few interesting insights/exercises I often investigate on my end. For example, a lot of players tend to get streaks of games with Leavers and say, "Wow, a majority of my games have a Leaver! This sucks Riot!" If we asked every single player here to look at their 10 recent game match history we'd probably find a decently low percentage of games with a Leaver across all of our match histories. But, one or two of us might actually have a decent string of games with Leavers.
However, if you are playing Ranked Solo/Duo Queue, it's unfortunately still about as toxic as it used to be 8-10 months ago. We recognize that very few of our player behavior solutions have targeted Ranked Solo/Duo Queue specifically thus far, but we hope to make some improvements in this space in 2013.
Lyte, no offense, but the attitude in games really has changed and I believed for the worse. I really have never understood why the system of sending reports to Riot is worse than having a single click report button system. If a player is truly toxic, wouldn't it be worth the time to send in a ticket? I think a lot of irrational reports happen after games?
Players do false report; however, the Report System automatically filters these. If a player reports legitimately often, his report 'power' goes up. If a player false reports often, his reports mean nothing.
I'm not sure any experience you have with attitudes in the game have to do with false reports after games.
I guess I've been extra unlucky this past week. Is there any new features coming soon that you can talk about?
I tend to see slightly worse behavior during holidays (like the Winter break), and weekends tend to be worse than weekdays.
I'm not quite ready to talk about the next features aimed at player behavior, but I've mentioned a few of the areas we'll be taking a look at in the near future.
These areas include:
- improving the speed of the Tribunal and getting toxic players punished quicker
- discussing new ways of handling punishments instead of just using timebans
- determining solutions for the toxicity in Champ Select Lobby
There's a lot more on our minds for 2013 than just the items here.
Should make it so that a # of reports bans you from ranked for x time
Stuff like this has been discussed and certainly isn't off the table.
@Lyte one of the problems I have with the Tribunal is the "provoker." You know when I read a case I read the whole thing not just the words of the accused. I must say in a lot of cases I hit punish on I really wish I could punish the jerk that started it all. Don't get me wrong it's not good to retaliate with negativity, but if the provoker isn't punished and the accused is we have a problem. Because at the end of the day they're BOTH wrong.
Provokers are almost always punished more quickly and more often than retaliators.
I also believe the warning you issue through email should flash on screen when they log in. I mean I totally forgot what email I even had attached to my account and rarely check it. This could also stop some people from acting poorly after the warning because they actually see it. Just my opinion and I know a lot of others don't check their email as often.
Thanks for the suggestion, this is something the team has been brainstorming about. We agree that we aren't reaching as many players as we should be with the Tribunal Warnings.
I have a question about the 'unskilled report', does this lower their invisible mmr so they get put into games with others that have been reported as unskilled or does it put them up to the tribunal?
I've done my fair share of tribunal votes and i am still yet to see an unskilled player flag.
Unskilled Reports aren't used in the Tribunal, but are aggregated for matchmaking analyses and adjustments.
We never want to ban a player for Unskilled Play because that makes no sense--everyone has bad games once in awhile, and League of Legends is for every player regardless of them being 500 Elo or 2000 Elo. If a player gets a lot of Unskilled Player reports (above the norm), then we need to figure out what went wrong in the matchmaking that the player got put into the wrong bracket and improve that.